Tuesday, April 2, 2019

EXTRA: History WAS made; with a pathetically-low vote turnout for mayor

There are going to be the people who will spew about the term “historic” to describe Tuesday’s mayoral run-off election – the one that saw a black woman (who also happens to be openly gay) get elected mayor of Chicago.
LIGHTFOOT: Now Herhonor-elect

Which does make us the largest U.S. city to have a chief executive who falls into those categories.

THERE ALSO ARE those who are going to see the roughly 3-1 voter ratio by which Lori Lightfoot defeated Toni Preckwinkle and they’re going to spew out the term “mandate”—as in implying her voter margin is so large that her election reflects the mood of the people. Such as the sentiment that Donald Trump fantasizes he has amongst a majority of the American people at-large.

As in people ought to feel an obligation to go along with Lightfoot’s political desires. As in going against Lightfoot somehow shows one just can’t get with the program. They need to accept her.

It is true that, with some two-thirds of the votes tallied Tuesday, Lightfoot had 74 percent of the mayoral vote – compared to 26 percent of people voting for Preckwinkle; the woman who once was considered the mayoral frontrunner.

But I’m going to admit that while some people are eager to toss out the terms “historic” and “mandate” on the Election Night, the term that keeps coming to my mind is “pathetic.”
PRECKWINKLE: Remains at County Bldg.

AS IN THE voter turnout was less than stellar.

The 2007 mayoral election that was Richard M. Daley’s last campaign may be the record low at 33 percent. But Tuesday saw a 34 percent voter turnout – which as late as 5 p.m. was as low as 29 percent. It took a last-minute surge of voters in the final hours the polling places were open to prevent this so-called “historic” election from being a record-low in terms of voter apathy.
EMANUEL: One more month as mayor

Which, by the way, was the same percentage we saw for the Feb. 26 election that reduced the 14 mayoral candidates down to the two finalists. Basically, two of every three people who were registered to vote decided they couldn’t be bothered.

Which really is odd because of the fact that the reason Rahm Emanuel chose not to seek a third term in office was because he supposedly sensed that the electorate wanted him gone. Could it really be that they likely would have been too apathetic to do much of anything to remove him from office?


No comments: